triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re[2]: Deposit on car - non lbc

To: "Shane F. Ingate" <ingate@shiseis.com>, <passaretti@sol.med.ge.com>, kengano@advant.com (Gano; Ken)
Subject: Re[2]: Deposit on car - non lbc
From: jbonina@nectech.com
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 08:57:44 -0500
Cc: <triumphs@Autox.Team.Net>
     Not trying to be a jerk to this ex-buyer, but, the onus would be on to 
     "prove" he gave me $400. I took cash, no receipt given.
     
     PS, he hasn't called me for a week now looking for his refund.
     
     Jeff


Subject: Re: Deposit on car - non lbc
Author:  kengano@advant.com (Gano; Ken) at SMTP
Date:    4/2/98 10:32 PM


     
With a few BIG exceptions (namely contracts involving real estate, contracts 
over a certain $ amount [$500 in Illinois] and contracts calling for 
performance over a certain period of time [1 year in Illinois]) oral 
contracts are just as binding as written.  The practical problem arises when 
the time comes to "prove" the contract.  The usual situation is that one 
party will swear (under oath) that one thing was said while the other party 
will swear (under oath - ain't truth a wonderful thing) just the opposite. 
The ultimate question is almost always, who's telling the truth.  Paper is 
cheap.  An oral contract isn't worth the head aches, or the paper they 
written on.
     
kengano@advant.com
downstate illinois
1959 TR3A TS57756L
1958 Model 10 Sedan TBE9239LDLB
practicing a little law, but one when I must.
     
-----Original Message-----
From: Shane F. Ingate <ingate@shiseis.com>
To: passaretti@sol.med.ge.com <passaretti@sol.med.ge.com> 
Cc: triumphs@autox.team.net <triumphs@autox.team.net> 
Date: Wednesday, April 01, 1998 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: Deposit on car - non lbc
     
     
>
>Mike,
> > This is why deposits are (IMHO) necessary.  I've had several 
> > cars sold out from underneath verbal commitments...
> [snip]
> > If I were a more litigious person I would have 
> > nailed his nether regions to a pole.
>
>I'm not an expert at law, but I thought verbal agreements dont amount
>to very much, so I dont understand your comment "If I were a more litigious 
>person I would have nailed his nether regions to a pole".  At least, I dont 
>understand how you could get away with it.
>
>I thought that if a deposit was accompanied by something in writing 
>(one would be foolish to do otherwise) then that was some sort of 
>a binding contract.  I did not know that verbal agreements were 
>legally binding.
>
>Could you (or some other lister) explain in lay language why you could 
>take this person to court based on a verbal agreement?  All of us
>on the list buy and sell cars at some stage in our lives, and we dont 
>want to get caught out!
>
> Shane Ingate in San Diego
     

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>